Category Archives: Processo di Appello | Appeals

Motivazioni della Sentenza di Appello | Motivations of the Appeals’ Verdict

Pubblichiamo le motivazioni della Sentenza dell’Appello (depositate il 6 febbraio 2015) | We publish the motivations for the Appeal Verdict (available since February 6, 2015):

Sentenza di Appello Parte I | Part I of the Appeal Verdict

Sentenza di Appello Parte II | Part II of the Appeal Verdict

Sentenza di Appello Parte III | Part III of the Appeal Verdict

Sentenza di Appello Parte IV | Part IV of the Appeal Verdict

Un interessante commento alla sentenza si trova in questa pagina | An interesting comment to the Verdict is available at this link:

Sentenza della Corte di Appello | Verdict of the Court of Appeals

Assolti Giulio Selvaggi, Franco Barberi, Enzo Boschi, Mauro Dolce, Claudio Eva, Michele Calvi. 

La Corte d’Appello dell’Aquila ha rideterminato in due anni la condanna inflitta in primo grado a Bernardo De Bernardinis che e’ stato come gli altri assolto per le imputazioni principali.

The Appeals Court has cleared Giulio Selvaggi, Franco Barberi, Enzo Boschi, Mauro Dolce, Claudio Eva, Michele Calvi;  Bernardo De Berardinis is convicted to two year of prison. He was, like the others, cleared of the main charges.

Ultima udienza del processo di Appello: dichiarazioni di Giulio Selvaggi

Stamattina si è tenuta l’ultima udienza del processo di Appello a L’Aquila.

Nella fase iniziale, prima degli avvocati difensori, ha parlato il nostro collega Giulio Selvaggi rilasciando la dichiarazione che riportiamo in foto.

Dichiarazioni di Giulio Selvaggi all'ultima udienza del processo di Appello a L'Aquila.

Dichiarazioni di Giulio Selvaggi all’ultima udienza del processo di Appello a L’Aquila.

La presidente della Corte di Appello a fine mattinata ha annunciato la sentenza tra le ore 16 e 17 di oggi.

Giulio Selvaggi statement at the hearing this morning

I started my career in Seismology in 1987, recording earthquakes in Umbria with instruments that used smoked paper. After almost thirty years my job is substantially the same. I still record earthquakes but now data are transmitted in real time using broad band connections, wifi, satellite channels, digital data, centralized networks, etc., thus only the technology has changed but not the goal of my studies. During these thirty years, I have studied in detail most of the seismic sequences that occurred in Italy. My colleagues and I have understood fundamental aspects related to the loading and the release of the seismic energy, sharing these results with the international scientific community through publication on international scientific journals. As researchers in seismology, our goal has always been advancing the understanding of earthquake process, aware that our work implied an important contribution to the operational choices for citizens’ safety.

The study of the elementary particles, for instance, teaches us the secrets of the origin of life and universe and has an enormous cultural value. However, this kind of research has not a direct impact on the safety of the society. Earthquakes, on the contrary, shake people’s life often dramatically.

Being aware of the social role of the earthquake research, the seismological scientific community has concentrated its efforts on the only useful target in order to mitigate earthquake risk, that is the seismic hazard map. It represents the synthesis of the work of many scientists and includes both positive and negative results. Among the latter, first of all, the impossibility to carry out short term earthquake predictions.

The most recent version of the seismic hazard map is the attachment no. 1 of the Prime Minister Ordinance (April 28 2006 no. 3519, published in the Official Gazette of the Italian State in May 11, 2006). In other words, the map – to which I am honored to have collaborated – has a regulatory value and represents the best tool provided by science to society in order to perform a modern defence against the earthquakes.

The value of the map relies not only in its regulatory function -it imposes the public authorities to construct safe buildings- but also on its fundamental educational value. It has been done in a simple way and for an easy reading, thought for people who do not know anything about seismology: a colour scale where the purple represents the highest hazard. That is what we said on March 31: L’Aquila is purple!

I think there is nothing more important for a seismologist in a seismic country than service the society to understand what’s going on.

With this belief I went to the meeting on March 31 and I would go there again today to state the same things, always agreeing with the statement made at the end of that meeting reminding and underlying the importance of prevention. However, the conscience of having spoken with scientific rigour and with honesty does not attenuate, as in the past, my grief for the victims of this earthquake.

This is what I wanted to say and I thank you all for listening to me.

The sentence is expected at  5 p.m.

Iniziato il processo di appello a L’Aquila

Ieri, dieci ottobre 2014, in Corte d’Appello all’Aquila è iniziato il secondo atto del processo agli esperti presenti alla riunione del 31 marzo 2009. Sotto accusa ci sono i sette condannati in primo grado (il 22 ottobre 2012) a 6 anni di reclusione per omicidio colposo e al risarcimento di diversi milioni di euro.


L’udienza di ieri è stata dedicata alla presentazione della sentenza di primo grado e dei contenuti degli appelli da parte della Giudice, alla presentazione dell’accusa da parte del Procuratore Como, a una prima esposizione di uno degli avvocati delle parti civili. La richiesta della Procura è stata la conferma della condanna a 6 anni di reclusione per tutti gli imputati e alla cancellazione delle pene accessorie, attribuite in primo grado. È stato inoltre stilato un serrato calendario delle prossime udienze (17, 18, 24 e 25 ottobre) che dovrebbe portare alla sentenza il 31 ottobre.

Noi siamo fiduciosi che in questo grado di giudizio si riconsidererà la posizione degli imputati al processo. Ricordiamo che il nostro collega Giulio Selvaggi, in quel periodo direttore del Centro Nazionale Terremoti, fu invitato alla riunione da Boschi (allora presidente dell’INGV) per illustrare una relazione tecnica sull’andamento della sequenza sismica stilata dagli esperti dell’INGV e autorizzata dal suo collegio d’Istituto; egli non era un membro della Commissione grandi rischi, non era autorizzato a fare valutazioni del rischio che infatti non fece; né lui né Boschi hanno rilasciato interviste in quella sede né hanno partecipato alla conferenza stampa tenutasi dopo la riunione.

Appeal of L’Aquila Process began

On October 10, 2014 at 9.30 a.m. at the Court of Appeal of L’Aquila began the session of an appeal with respect to the convicted experts, who participated in the March 31, 2009 meeting of the National Commission for forecasting and preventing great risks. On October 22, 2012 the trial court sentenced the seven experts for manslaughter to 6 years in prison and an additional payment of 7 million Euros.

The panel of judges of the Court of Appeal is chaired by Fabrizia Ida Francabandera, Carla De Matteis and Marco Flamini. The prosecution will be represented by the general attorney Romolo Como.

The yesterday’s session was devoted to the Judge presentation of the first-instance verdict and the subsequent appeals, to the presentation of the prosecution by the attorney Como, and in a first discussion of to one of the lawyers. The Public Prosecutor’s request was the confirmation of the sentence to 6 years imprisonment for all the accused and the cancellation of accessory penalties. It was decided a tight schedule of upcoming sessions (17, 18, 24 and 25 October), which should lead to the judgment of 31 October.

We are confident that in this level of judgment the judges will reconsider the position of the defendants at trial. We would like to recall that our colleague Giulio Selvaggi – at the time director of the National Earthquake Center – was invited by Boschi -at the time INGV-President – to participate in the meeting exclusively for illustrating a technical report on the seismic sequence, compiled by INGV experts and authorized by the INGV board; he was neither a member of the National Commission for forecasting and preventing great risks, nor he was authorized to express any risk assessment; neither Selvaggi nor Boschi gave interviews at that time, and both did not attend the press conference held after the meeting.

%d bloggers like this: